Vishal Verma <[email protected]> writes:
> Add a note to the --squash option for git-merge to clarify its behavior
> with respect to --commit. When --squash is supplied, 'option_commit' is
> silently dropped. This can be surprising to a user who tries to override
> the no-commit behavior of squash using --commit explicitly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vishal Verma <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> There may be an argument to make --commit 'just work' with squash, but
> that might involve changing option_commit from OPT_BOOL to something
> that can distinguish between the default, what's requested on the
> command line, or the --no- version.
I think it is bad to silently ignore the option. With or without
this documentation update, I think it is sensible to update the code
so that it errors out when "--squash --commit" are both given at the
same time, just like when "--squash --no-ff" is given.
Or make it "just work" as you said. Using a boolean variable as
tristate is something we do in many places and it by itself is not a
rocket science. You initialize the variable to -1 (unset), let
parse_options() to set it to 0/1 when "--[no-]commit" is seen, and
inspect after parse_options() finishes. If the variable is still
-1, you know the user wants "the default" behaviour.
The "default" behaviour you are proposing would probably be
something like
if (option_commit < 0) {
/*
* default to record the result in a commit.
* but --squash traditionally does not.
*/
if (!squash)
option_commit = 1;
else
option_commit = 0;
}
But I suspect that the option parsing part is the least difficult in
the "make it just work" change. That is because I think that the
machinery to record the result in a commit is not expecting to be
asked to create a single-parent commit to record the result of the
squashing, so there may be need for adjusting to how the result
wants to be recorded before the code makes a commit.
